Right | The prosecutors of the Katiska drug case illegally obtained information about the activities of the award-winning lawyer

Huge The prosecutors of the Katiska drug ring have received a notice from the Chancellor of Justice about the illegal procedure in connection with the handling of the drug case.

The lawyer of one of the people suspected of a crime in the Katiska gang filed a complaint about the prosecutors’ procedure Mark Fredman.

The notice received by the prosecutors concerns the events in 2019 before the charges were filed and the trial of the drug ring.

The special prosecutors of the Katiska network Erkki Huhtala and Heli Vesaaja had heard from one of the police officers of the investigation team that lawyer Fredman had intimidated and threatened his own boss during the prison meeting and had announced that the boss was not allowed to tell things about another person suspected of a crime.

Fredman’s boss was not one of the key actors in the Katiska drug cartel. He was sentenced to five years in prison for, among other things, a serious drug crime and a serious doping crime. The judgment is not legally binding, as the processing of the Katiska skein is in progress at the Helsinki Court of Appeal.

Police started a preliminary investigation into whether, based on Fredman’s alleged actions, there is a reason to start a preliminary investigation.

During the preliminary investigation, special prosecutor Huhtala inquired by email about the alleged threat from lawyer Fredman. Huhtala received a response from the lawyer and forwarded it to the police.

According to Fredman, he was misled by the special prosecutor because he was not told about the ongoing preliminary investigation into the possible illegality of his actions.

In his complaint, Fredman also criticized Huhtala for passing on the correspondence containing attorney secrets to the police.

Fredman is one of Finland’s best-known criminal lawyers. He was elected Lawyer of the Year in 2003, besides which he has received other recognitions.

He has also taken dozens of cases to the European Court of Human Rights, which oversees compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Chancellor of Justice according to which the prosecutors, contrary to their official duties, obtain information from the lawyer for the police’s preliminary investigation. The Chancellor of Justice characterized the prosecutors’ procedure as a serious mistake.

According to the Chancellor of Justice, it seems that the prosecutors tried to circumvent the provisions of the Pretrial Investigation Act and the right of a criminal suspect not to contribute to the investigation of his possible crime.

“The response was obtained and delivered to the police without the complainant being told that the information is obtained for a preliminary investigation regarding his own procedure,” states the Chancellor of Justice.

According to the chancellor of justice, the problem of the procedure was increased by the impression that the prosecutors were trying to find out the contents of the confidential conversations held by the lawyer and this principal, while they themselves were acting as the opposing party’s prosecutors.

Police decided, based on the preliminary investigation, not to start a preliminary investigation into the activities of lawyer Fredman, because there was no reason to suspect him of a crime in the case.

Fredman’s boss stated in the preliminary investigation that he does not know what the alleged threat is about.